I don’t read Catholic Culture much anymore, but I always felt, after the departure of Diogenes, that Phil Lawler was their best writer. I never had much cotton for Jeff Mirus, he who would spin doctrine into incomprehensible meaninglessness in order to maintain the fantasy that Vatican II introduced absolutely no novelties into the Faith. I did eventually stop reading the site entirely when I tired of their constant and (I don’t think it unfair to say) outrageous fundraising, but a link from Rorate brought me to this article by Lawler, wherein he wonders just what is going on at a Vatican that appears to be compiling a very detailed enemies list, the better to serve the most merciful of pontificates (my emphasis and comments):

Last week the Vatican Insider—ordinarily a solid source of news and reasonable analysis from Rome [If more than slightly biased towards the happy-clappy, we’re all doing great! variety]—published a remarkable piece with an inflammatory headline, “Catholics who are anti-Francis but love Putin.” The article is troubling, for several reasons:

The article seeks to convey the impression that there is a conspiracy against Pope Francis. “The attack against Francis is global,” the authors write, a bit breathlessly.

The authors lump together disparate groups and individuals, with very different ideas and priorities, as if they formed a united front of opposition to the papacy. All those who have questioned public statements by Pope Francis are seen as “enemies,” not as loyal critics. [This is a vastly important point, because it points to motivations. Those engaged in a conspiracy towards revolution invariably view their opponents not as loyal critics or even misguided but well meaning individuals, but as enemies to the revolutionary spirit. This is practically a cliche of the Left both historically and as it operates today]

As its title suggests, the article smears the Pope’s critics with the claim that they are more enthusiastic about a Russian strongman than about the Vicar of Christ. [I’m pretty cold to both, actually]

The authors, Giacomo Galeazzi and Andrea Tornielli are not ordinarily prone to sensationalism. They are respected reporters for La Stampa, with solid Vatican sources. Tornielli in particular has frequently broken important news stories, demonstrating that he has access to ranking insiders. Therefore….

Most disquieting of all, it seems likely that what Galeazzi and Tornielli wrote reflects what they have heard from their contacts in the Roman Curia. If that is the case, then some of the people surrounding Pope Francis believe that the Pontiff is the victim of a budding conspiracy. Having adopted the paranoid style, they see enemies wherever there is resistance to their agenda. [As revolutionaries are wont to do. Personnel is policy. People tend to hire or appoint like-minded individuals. Look at Farrell. I have no doubt if there is a growing sense of a papacy surrounded by “enemies,” this notion starts at the top. There have been many anecdotal stories to this effect, from the chair-throwing tantrums to the exceedingly vindictive treatment of priests, religious, and prelates who have been judged hostile to this pontificate]

[This is really important, and correlates precisely with what the Cardinal Kung Foundation has been reporting]……...On the list of papal “enemies” identified by Vatican Insider, possibly the most curious entry involves Chinese Catholics who are worried about the state of current negotiations between the Vatican and Beijing. Here it is very difficult to see how someone could be registered as an “enemy” of the Holy Father, since Pope Francis has made only a few circumspect comments about those negotiations. Nevertheless it seems clear that someone(s) inside the Vatican are unhappy with those who publicize the worries of the ‘underground’ Church in China, and remind us of the dangers of yielding to a regime that is determined to control the Church.

Think about that. The Vatican is negotiating with China. The talks are secret; no official stands have been taken, except in the most general terms. Friends of the Church in China are urging the negotiators to be mindful of the concerns of Chinese Catholics who have already suffered so much for their faith. Why would that sort of urging be seen as a sign of opposition—unless the negotiators are, indeed, prepared to sell out the interests of the ‘underground’ Church? [Ding Ding!] And why would it be seen as opposition to the Pope, who has not spoken on the issue and has presumably not been presented with an agreement to approve or reject, unless the negotiators are wrapping themselves in the mantle of papal authority? [Why indeed. Cardinal Zen of Hong Kong has many times reported that the “negotiations” are a farce, that surrender or sacrifice, of the orthodox Church in China that has suffered unbelievably for its loyalty to Rome, is just around the corner]

……..“You can also betray a person with too much applause.”

Exactly. And this really touches on a subject much broader than simply one really bad pontiff. It has to do with the dangers inherent in the cult of personality that has been a growing phenomenon surrounding the papacy for centuries, but which took on entirely new dimensions after Vatican I and, even more, Vatican II. As popes began to endorse things that had never been endorsed before, or were at least exceedingly novel and dangerous, the cloak of infallibility began to portrayed more and more as a cloak of impeccability, of popes who could do no wrong (unless they were Benedict, and, to a much lesser extent, JPII).

I’m not saying the Doctrine of infallibility is wrong; of course not, that would be heretical. But I do fear it has been greatly misconstrued and misapplied, often for destructive ends, and the Franciscan papacy is looking more and more like an apotheosis of this tendency.

One thing I can say for sure – the millions of faithful Catholics in China who have endured decades of brutal repression and persecution are the last people anyone in the Church should ever view as an “enemy.”